When analysing the interview transcripts, there seemed to be patterns within the attitudes of parents towards work and care across the three locations. Even accounting for variations in household incomes and educational background as Pungello et al. (1999) suggest, different work and care disposition trends seemed apparent. To investigate these frames of interest further, Bell et. al.’s (2005) analytical tools are useful. They found that, in making decisions about childcare and work, a mother’s personal disposition towards work or towards care is an important factor in decision-making, and that these dispositions can be categorised within a matrix where the work disposition and care disposition can be viewed as continuums upon which mothers’ attitudes can be plotted. This reflects Bourdieu’s approach in thinking about fields in more general terms, expressing the field figuratively with two intersecting axis representing economic capital and the other, cultural capital, as is done in Figure 16 (Bourdieu, 1998, p.270). Each quadrant represents a social field, each of which has ‘distinction’ (Bourdieu, 1984) which, based on individuals’ positions in social space, can be clustered according to the same or similar characteristics or correspondences highlighting the presence or absence of a group habitus while indicating the power relationships that draw individuals to cluster (Grenfell, 2014). The presence of outliers, suggested Bourdieu, also shows that habitus is not deterministic, showing that individuals are capable of ‘free play’ within fields rather than being subject to the “mechanical forces or rational action theory” (Bourdieu, 1988, p. 25). The matrix in Figure 16 can therefore represent both the parental positions on work and care and their portfolios of economic and cultural capital.
Figure 16: Typology of parents’ work/parental care dispositions (Bell et al. 2005)
In Sector A are parents with a high work disposition but also strongly disposed towards providing maternal care. These were mothers who, by their own admissions, ‘wanted it all’, such as Alana and Sarah.
“I always kind of wanted to work, but even now I think I would like to be at home with them.” (Lisa)
“I think sometimes I was jealous as I’d arrange a nice baby group for [grandparents] to go to and I’d be thinking that should be me doing that and I did want to be home but I did realise that I couldn’t be a stay-at-home mum. Looking back, I think I could of afforded to stay at home but I think I would have struggled to get back into a job afterwards.” (Sarah)
These are the mothers for whom tensions between care and work were found to be greatest and who were most likely to compromise one ideal for another. As Lisa says:
“…somedays even now I think I would like to be at home with them, to always be there for school pick-ups and drop-offs, when they’re poorly and everything, but other days I think I get the balance right. I wouldn’t want to be full-time. I’m the kind of person who always questions what I’m doing, and I’m always reflecting on what as a parent I’m doing the right thing.” (Lisa) Some of the mothers interviewed in this category, including Sarah, expressed strong feelings about informal care as “the next best thing” to maternal care, with grandparents preferred as having the same norms and values (Wheelock and Jones, 2002b).
In Sector B are mothers with a high work disposition and a lower disposition towards parental care, such as Lesley. These parents were those that were in the workforce, or committed to being so after
maternity leave or a career break. Work for them was an intrinsic part of their identity, saying “…I couldn’t be a stay-at-home mum” (Rachel) or “I always knew I didn’t want to give up work” (Rhian), and therefore they had fewer conflicts in combining work and care than those in Sector A.
In Sector C are those mothers with lower work and higher care dispositions. Some viewed motherhood as a ‘job’ in its own right, and felt that undertaking work outside the home would impinge too much on their maternal role. These mothers were often the most forthright in justifying their decisions in the context of child development or children’s happiness, and felt that working would be detrimental to their children.
“I want to be there for them even if we haven’t got as much money. You can never replace the love for your child with stuff.” (Leanne)
“It’s my personal choice not to use childcare. I want to stay at home and look after them myself. You can’t have that time back with them when they’re little.” (Donna)
In Sector D were those who were not strongly motivated to join the labour market and generally stayed at home with their children, but did not necessarily value maternal care highly. Indeed, they often saw value in non-maternal care as being an opportunity for children to develop socially and cognitively.
“I take him to [Flying Start] because they just go in and they form bonds really early and the parents have got friendships as well. So I think, it gets him used to doing a little bit more constructive, you know listening, sharing and sitting down whereas at home if you are an only child, you don’t have to share your toys with anybody do you. So when they go to school it's a bit of a culture shock.” (Abigail)
Attitudes to work and motherhood were also found to be affected by the behaviour of other mothers, particularly as mothers move in circles where social feedback effects are intensified, tending to mix with others of a similar social and employment status to themselves:
“It’s only a little village we live in, up in the valley…It’s a nice community, it’s a nice happy place, there’s some really nice mums…a lot of mums that don’t work because of childcare, they say because the cost of childcare is ridiculous. So it’s a lot of mums like me at home, a lot of single mums that stay at home with their kids…It’s nice. We meet up and our kids play together and it’s alright.” (Elaine)
These parents often expressed their low work disposition in fatalistic terms, saying that childcare was either too expensive or not available to them to allow them to work:
“…if you don’t have relatives, you can’t work.” (Carla)
“I can't really recall there being any local childcare available to me and as I don't drive I can’t see how I can work.” (Elaine)
Using Bell et al.’s (2005) typologies, the content of the 45 interview transcripts were coded within NVivo for key words and phrases that indicated care and work dispositions, and then given a 1 to 10 score for each category. The benefit in analysing data in this way is that it focuses on the beliefs and values that parents expressed through their narratives, rather than assuming dispositions from behaviour. Matrix coding within Nvivo (Silver and Lewins, 2014, p.89) illustrates how dispositions were distributed across the four sectors of the matrix, while colour coding highlights the locality of each participant.
Figure 17: Work / care dispositions of mothers interviewed by case study area
The analysis shows that, most commonly, mothers’ dispositions were towards both work and care, (Sector A) with few parents expressing low care and low work dispositions (Sector D). Those who were orientated less towards work were most often still very care-orientated (Sector C). Between the locality areas, there were some clusters indicating differing norms and attitudes. In Wrexham, mothers were found to be more work-orientated but were also highly care-orientated (although there
were some significant outliers). These parents were therefore the most likely to experience the greatest conflicts in balancing family, care and employment, as illustrated by Alana and Lisa (see above). They were also those who talked about childcare as having a developmental as well as a custodial function (Hansen, Joshi and Verropoulou, 2005, p.1), recognising the role that childcare, like education, has in cultural reproduction (Reay, 2004, p.58):
“If even I wasn’t working I think I’d still send her to [day nursery] for the benefit she gets. I can really see how she’s come out of herself since going. I’d be more worried about her going to school next September if she just been at home. She’s really ready for it now and she’ll do really well.” (Charlotte)
In Blaenau Gwent, while mothers were found to be the least work-orientated, they were the most care-orientated - although it is difficult to be clear whether this was due to adapted norms feeding back from limited choice and opportunity in an area with the lowest rate of employment and very little formal childcare available. To confirm this, a longitudinal aspect to the study would be necessary to gauge dispositions before parents had children and then afterwards. This was, however, done by Himmelweit and Sigala (2002) in their study examining mothers’ childcare decisions. Although examining social rather than geographical groups, they concluded that, in this situation, mothers adopt the behaviour which is characteristic of, and thus normative for, the groups they belong to or closely identify with (2002, p.10).
In Ceredigion, work disposition was found to be evenly spread along the axis, but mothers were the least care-orientated. These parents definitely wanted to work and did not necessarily want to provide full-time childcare themselves (although, again, there were some significant outliers). Notable in Ceredigion were the number of self-employed mothers, such as Fran:
“I knew that I couldn’t and wouldn’t go back to work full or even part-time, so I set up my own business as a picture framer. My daughter has her own space in the workshop with me. I know it sounds awful, but I’ve made her a kind of pen with lots of toys and cushions and stuff and she knows by now that mum has to work.” (Fran, translation)
Ceredigion parents experienced fewer pressures between work and care, and were more prepared to use non-parental care, and informal care rather than formal care, to support work, but this is set within the context of the difficulties faced by families in rural areas. Carys was returning to work as a Health Visitor after the birth of her second child when she was interviewed, and provided an interesting perspective:
“Many families in Ceredigion are so used to providing their own childcare that they are bemused when I ask them about it! They have no idea what should be provided, or even that they might have the right to ask for it. Where childcare providers do exist, they seem to be fully stretched and at full capacity…Some parents who farm find childcare a problem even though they’re at home during the day. Lambing time is really difficult because there’s no one to look after the children. One mum I knew was a dairy farmer said that as their day started at 5 o’clock how was she going to find someone to come in to look after the children at that time?” (Carys, translation)
There are clear parallels here between Ceredigion and Halliday and Little’s (2001) study of rural childcare in Devon, where they found that for rural families, childcare was an organizational minefield, requiring constant adjustment and negotiation, and where childcare choices took place within a shifting picture of provision (2001, p.435).
Forry et al. (2013, p.20) conclude in their literature review of childcare decision-making, that variation in parental priorities has been associated with socio-demographic features of the community as well as social networks within neighbourhoods. Huff and Cotte (2013, p.94) also suggest that community characteristics influence parental choice of childcare, including the quality and quantity of childcare supply, the characteristics of the parents’ employment and social networks, and the quality and availability of childcare information. Yet in Chapter Five, once employment was controlled for, regression analysis found no significant relationship between localities – as defined by local authority areas - in Wales and parental choice. However, a stronger link was found in the survey data between choice and social networks which are likely to operate at a more local level.
Two dynamics are therefore evident from this analysis of the data. First, is that parents with similar capitals in different spaces can have very different dispositions towards work and care as a result of both external constraints and a habitus modified by membership of social groups. This is apparent from the stories of Elaine from Blaenau Gwent and Jenny from Wrexham. Both clearly had difficult childhoods, received only paternal care and became young lone parents themselves with little educational capital. Yet Jenny, as discussed on page 177 has a high work disposition, has always tried to work and is set on a career. Whereas Elaine’s work disposition, as evidenced by her comments on page 183 is much lower because of the external constraints around childcare and work where she lives, and also the reinforcement she gets from being a part of a social group with other mothers in the same situation. Jenny,
Secondly, space is important for another reason in Ceredigion, as parents operate within a rural childcare field. As found by Brown & Baker (2014, p.51), traditional class groupings in Welsh-speaking areas have less currency, supporting the evidence from interviews suggesting that capitals operate in a different way. Alternatively, the rurality of the area may reduce any class advantage as was observed by Halliday & Little (2001) in their study of childcare in Devon. While the statistics show that employment opportunities in Ceredigion are far greater, the economic capital that this endows a Wrexham parent with to choose from a range of childcare options is replaced in rural areas by valuable social capital in the form of informal care and other social support networks. Yet this is only the case for some parents, leaving those without access to networks of support disadvantaged.
Differences between work and care dispositions found between the localities would therefore seem to indicate different norms and attitudes, while the profiles of each locality (see page 32) can be seen to provide additional explanation. A high disposition towards work in Ceredigion is unsurprising given it has the highest proportion of working parents, greatest job density and where adults are more likely to have higher qualifications. Blaenau Gwent, on the other hand, has the lowest proportion of working households with children, few employment opportunities locally and more people have low qualifications. This suggests first, that capitals are likely to be inequitably distributed amongst individuals across the three areas, resulting in differing locality habitus forming. Secondly, values and dispositions derived from family, neighbours and friends will result in differing norms and practices within each area. Thirdly, it would seem likely from interview accounts that external constraints of fields such as limited choice and availability of both employment opportunities and childcare in an area such as Blaenau Gwent contribute to an adapted habitus inclined more towards care than work. The same is true in Wrexham, where different conditions in the childcare field - notably the more extensive availability of formal childcare - result in parents having greater opportunities to utilise the capitals they possess.